Nanaimo Stayed Orange. Did Anyone Hear the Warning?

on

An older Nanaimo taxpayer reviews household bills beside modest groceries and an empty envelope labelled “Grocery Rebate,” with the harbour visible through the window.
Nanaimo’s two NDP MLAs kept their seats. But both lost ground. For a party with deep roots in this community, that should prompt some serious listening.

George Anderson’s preliminary vote in Nanaimo–Lantzville fell from 15,307 in 2024 to 11,567. His share of valid votes dropped from 51.75% to 46.66%, and his winning margin shrank from 3,620 votes to 866.

Sheila Malcolmson’s preliminary tally in Nanaimo–Gabriola Island fell from 14,663 to 11,079. Her vote share declined from 52.75% to 48.10%, while her winning margin narrowed from 5,030 votes to 2,817.

These comparisons use final 2024 results and preliminary 2026 results. Vote shares exclude rejected ballots and represent votes cast, not all eligible voters.

Both won. Neither retained the support of more than half the voters casting valid ballots.

The broader Nanaimo area has long been NDP territory, although the present riding boundaries were introduced in 2024. Familiar political loyalties remain strong—but they should never be mistaken for unconditional approval.

The cheque that never arrived



Consider the promised $1,000 grocery rebate.

The NDP campaigned on that relief in 2024, then cancelled it in February 2025. The government cited tariff threats and difficult economic circumstances, saying the commitment would cost approximately $2 billion.

Yet the budget that followed projected a $10.9 billion deficit for 2025–26. The subsequent deficit forecast for 2026–27 reached $13.8 billion. Those are different fiscal years, but the question about priorities remains.

Cancelling the rebate avoided another expense. It did not balance the books.

What spending took priority? What alternatives were examined? Why was direct household relief a promise the government decided it could no longer afford?

Governments must fund essential services. But households have essential expenses too—and considerably less room to manoeuvre.

We cannot prove the broken promise caused either MLA’s declining support. We can reasonably ask whether it weakened confidence in the next affordability pledge.

Their pay falls—but remains substantial

Moving into opposition also changes the compensation attached to their former roles.

At current scheduled salary rates, assuming neither receives another paid appointment:

MLA Previous annual salary* Basic MLA salary Annual reduction*
Sheila Malcolmson $183,064 $122,043 $61,021
George Anderson $146,452 $122,043 $24,409

*Annualized gross amounts, rounded to the nearest dollar, using the salary schedule effective April 1, 2026. These are comparisons of scheduled pay, not confirmed reductions in actual annual earnings.

Malcolmson’s supplement accompanied her cabinet position. Anderson received the higher supplement for serving as Deputy Chair of the Committee of the Whole, rather than adding that allowance to his parliamentary-secretary pay.

New opposition or legislative appointments could change these figures. Malcolmson’s ministerial pay continues until her appointment formally ends, normally when the new cabinet takes office.

For community context, Nanaimo’s estimated 2024 per-capita income was $45,297. That measure includes children and is not the average salary of a working adult. It also relates to a different year from the MLA salary figures.

A comfortable income does not make someone incapable of understanding hardship. It does make listening—and acting on what is heard—especially important.

Representation needs follow-through

In my own case, I submitted a written constituent question to Mr. Anderson. An automated reply warned that workload might delay an answer. As of this writing, no substantive response has followed.

That is my experience, not a complete assessment of his work. But it raises a fair question: what standard of response should constituents expect from the representative and office they fund?

Staff can provide excellent assistance. The important measure is whether the question gets answered, the concern gets investigated or the limits of available help get explained.

My concern is that political contact can become too focused on maintaining support, with too little visible follow-through. Conversations matter. Results and answers matter too.

The same test belongs at city hall and in Victoria: What changes in your spending decisions because the people paying the bills are struggling?

Re-election gives our representatives another opportunity to serve. It does not relieve them of the obligation to answer.

Sources and notes

Opinion commentary. The constituent correspondence described above is the author’s personal account.

Comments

Post a Comment

Thank you for your input. Your comment will appear once reviewed.